I kept hearing the same argument from optimists: “Don’t worry, recycling will solve the silver shortage.”
The logic seems sound. Silver prices are high. High prices incentivize recycling. More recycling means more supply. Problem solved.
But then I looked at the data. And it doesn’t work that way.
From 2020 to 2025, silver prices went up 533 percent. Recycling supply went up 21 percent.
That’s a 25-fold difference.
So why didn’t high prices trigger massive recycling expansion?
Three reasons. And they’re all structural, not economic.
First, scrap generation has a ceiling. Where does recycled silver come from? Mostly from silverware. There’s about 1.2 billion ounces of silverware in circulation globally. People only sell when they need money. Or when they inherit it and don’t want it.
You can’t recycle more silverware than exists. At most, 5 percent of the stock gets recycled per year. That’s 60 million ounces annually. Maximum.
Meanwhile, solar demand for silver is growing 20 percent per year. So recycling is falling further behind every year.
Second, refining capacity is maxed out. Global recycling refining capacity is about 200 million ounces per year. And it’s running at 95 percent utilization. Building new capacity takes 2 to 3 years and costs $50 to 100 million.
Here’s the problem. Recyclers won’t invest in new capacity unless they’re confident in stable feedstock for 10 years. But silverware supply is erratic. Economic conditions drive it. Not prices.
So capacity stays constrained.
Third, economics don’t work for most scrap. E-waste contains silver, but recovering it costs $15 to 25 per ounce. When silver traded at $30, that made no sense. Even at $64, the margins are thin.
Silverware recycling is driven by macroeconomic need, not by silver prices. When unemployment is high, more silverware gets recycled. When the economy is good, less gets recycled.
So you can’t solve a supply shortage through recycling alone. It’s fundamentally constrained by the supply of scrap and the economics of recovery.
What would the maximum recycling scenario look like?
By 2030, maybe we get:
- 65 million ounces from silverware
- 45 million ounces from e-waste (with massive capex)
- 35 million ounces from industrial scrap
- Total: 145 million ounces per year
But demand by 2030 could be 850 to 930 million ounces.
So recycling solves 16 to 17 percent of the gap. The remaining 83 to 84 percent has to come from somewhere else.
It won’t come from recycling. It’ll have to come from new mines. Or demand has to moderate.
And moderation seems unlikely when the entire world is shifting to solar and EVs.
So we’re back to the core problem. Supply can’t keep up. Recycling can’t bridge the gap. Prices stay elevated.
The uncomfortable truth is that recycling is a supplementary source, not a solution.